Abstract
Rationale and objectives
To assess the frequency of clinically significant incidental CT findings on PET/CT.
Materials and methods
Reports of 345 cases of baseline standard skull base to thighs PET/CT exams done over the course of a 6 month period at an outpatient facility affiliated with a large tertiary care level 1 trauma medical center were retrospectively reviewed. Incidental CT findings were assigned a level of clinical significance on a scale of 1–5, from doubtful significance to very significant. CT findings already known from prior CT reports were not included. CT findings corresponding to PET findings were also excluded. A score of 3 or greater was considered significant and reportable.
Results
Out of 345 cases, 171 (50%) had a least one CT finding rated at or above a score of 3 on our scale of significance, while 96 (28%) were found to have at least one CT finding with score at or above 4, and 25 cases (7%) showed at least one CT finding rated 5.
Conclusion
A substantial percentage of baseline PET/CT studies contain previously undiagnosed, significant incidental findings on the CT images.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- CI:
-
Confidence interval
- PET:
-
Positron emission tomography
- CT:
-
Computed tomography
References
Townsend DW (2008) Combined positron emission tomography–computed tomography: the historical perspective. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 29:232–235
Townsend DW, Carney JP, Yap JT, Hall NC (2004) PET/CT today and tomorrow. J Nucl Med 45(Suppl 1):4S–14S
Bar-Shalom R, Yefremov N, Guralnik L, et al. (2003) Clinical performance of PET/CT in evaluation of cancer: additional value for diagnostic imaging and patient management. J Nucl Med 44:1200–1209
Buck AK, Herrmann K, Stargardt T, et al. (2010) Economic evaluation of PET and PET/CT in oncology: evidence and methodologic approaches. J Nucl Med Technol 38:6–17
Berland LL, Silverman SG, Gore RM, et al. (2010) Managing incidental findings on abdominal CT: white paper of the ACR incidental findings committee. J Am Coll Radiol 7:754–773
Sgourakis G, Lanitis S, Korontzi M, et al. (2011) Incidental findings in focused assessment with sonography for trauma in hemodynamically stable blunt trauma patients: speaking about cost to benefit. J Trauma 71:E123–E127
van Vugt R, Dekker HM, Deunk J, et al. (2011) Incidental findings on routine thoracoabdominal computed tomography in blunt trauma patients. J Trauma
Orme NM, Fletcher JG, Siddiki HA, et al. (2010) Incidental findings in imaging research: evaluating incidence, benefit, and burden. Arch Intern Med 170:1525–1532
Apfaltrer P, Schymik G, Reimer P, et al. (2012) Aortoiliac CT angiography for planning transcutaneous aortic valve implantation: aortic root anatomy and frequency of clinically significant incidental findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 198:939–945
Lieberman DA (2009) Clinical practice. Screening for colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 361:1179–1187
Cohade C, Osman M, Nakamoto Y, et al. (2003) Initial experience with oral contrast in PET/CT: phantom and clinical studies. J Nucl Med 44:412–416
Conflicts of interest
None.
Funding
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schaaf, W.E., Patel, Z., Retrouvey, M. et al. Frequency and clinical relevance of PET/CT incidentalomas. Abdom Imaging 39, 657–662 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0086-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00261-014-0086-0